<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
I also have significant concerns about ICANN's plan to penalize noncommercial users who are not "active" in the GNSO with less representation.<div><br></div><div>When you vote in a democracy, you don't have to prove that you donated 100 hours of community service in order to be entitled to a vote, as ICANN proposes. No, this is just another another mechanism to gate and minimize user participation and influence.</div><div><br></div><div>What about people in developing countries who can't get online and can't raise the funds to get to ICANN meetings or to be in a position to donate their time to ICANN? They aren't entitled to a vote on Internet policy because they aren't "active" enough for ICANN? What about the fact ICANN is mainly conducted in English? It seems non-English speakers who cannot "actively" participate don't deserve a vote either?</div><div><br></div><div>ICANN needs to understand it costs noncommercial organizations and individuals to participate at ICANN in ways that are unique to all other ICANN stakeholders. There are significant bars to ICANN participation that ICANN cannot use to "gate" to representation of noncommercial users. Not in a democratic institution accountable to the global public interest.</div><div><br></div><div>Robin</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div>On Aug 6, 2009, at 2:17 AM, William Drake wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Hi Adam,</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">I'm fine with restating openness to dialogue etc as you suggest.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Not that we haven't before.</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Would like to pick up on one specific bit:</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:37 AM, Adam Peake wrote:</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div> <blockquote type="cite"><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">The NCUC does not have membership (or significant membership) from international consumer organizations (noted in many recent comments from the board and others as a missing constituent in all of ICANN), nor for the largest academic communities, libraries, R&D, etc.</div> </blockquote><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">This may well be "noted" by the board and others but it is patently untrue <a href="http://ncuc.syr.edu/members.htm">http://ncuc.syr.edu/members.htm</a>. <span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Just more disinformation.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>(BTW I also noted some on the transcript of the ALAC call, e.g. Nick saying that the NCUC proposal does not allow board approval of constituencies...facts don't matter if one can't be bothered to learn them).</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Which is not to say that it wouldn't be great to have more groups with "consumer" in their title etc.</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Perhaps this needs to be a larger, more focused discussion sometime, but while I think of it it's worth mentioning that there is also a claim in said circles that our members are not all sufficiently active and hence our diversity is just on paper, which in turn is supposed to allow for "capture" by a small cabal.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>This of course is held against us as well, and will be relevant in the NCSG.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>As you know, the staff's "Suggested Additional Stakeholder Group Charter Elements to Ensure Transparency, Openness, Fairness and Representativeness Principles" hold, inter alia, that "It is important that the Board and the community have the ability to determine what parties comprise a particular GNSO structure and who participates in an active way....[hence] Each GNSO structure should collect, maintain, and publish active and inactive member names identified by membership category (if applicable)"</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">I raised concerns about the reasoning and operational implications of this on the last GNSO call, but they were pretty much brushed aside.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>So I guess in some unknown manner members will have to show sufficient signs of life on a frequent enough basis for staff to deem them active and consider their views to "count" when constituencies state positions.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Oh, and meeting attendance lists must be published and will be considered too.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>At least, all this undoubtedly will apply to nomcomm constituencies, business ones may get the usual pass from the standards to which we're held.</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">And now I have to reply to the council list about this claim in the SOI that we are "not yet sufficiently diverse or robust to select all six"...sigh.<span class="Apple-converted-space"> </span>Pushing back on relentless disinfo does get tiring...</div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; min-height: 14px; "><br></div><div style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; ">Bill</div> </blockquote></div><br><div> <span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0; "><div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div><br class="khtml-block-placeholder"></div><div>IP JUSTICE</div><div>Robin Gross, Executive Director</div><div>1192 Haight Street, San Francisco, CA 94117 USA</div><div>p: +1-415-553-6261 f: +1-415-462-6451</div><div>w: <a href="http://www.ipjustice.org">http://www.ipjustice.org</a> e: <a href="mailto:robin@ipjustice.org">robin@ipjustice.org</a></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"></span><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"> </div><br></div></body></html>